One of the main objectives of President Donald Trump’s proposal to improve data centers and artificial intelligence was to remove obstacles to quick expansion.
And that meant attacking the National Environmental Policy Act, a landmark law that has been in place for 55 years and aims to safeguard the environment by requiring authorities to take into account the potential effects of a project and giving the public a voice before approving it. Data centers have sparked a lot of demand.
Suggested Videos
Trump declared last week that he will try to repeal the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in order to expedite environmental studies and permits for data centers and associated infrastructure. NEPA has long been attacked by Republicans and business interests for what they see to be an unjustifiable slowdown in development. Trump’s plan would grant data centers category exclusions in order to maximize permitting efficiency.
“The administration is focused on driving meaningful NEPA reform to reduce the delays in federal permitting, unleashing the ability for America to strengthen its manufacturing and artificial intelligence leadership,” a White House Council on Environmental Quality spokesman said.
For months, the Trump administration has been making the legislation weaker.
This is standard procedure for this administration. According to Erin Doran, senior staff attorney at environmental nonprofit Food & Water Watch, the mindset is to pave the way for initiatives that negatively impact communities and the environment.
What you should know about Trump’s attempt to dismantle this important environmental law is as follows:
Why is NEPA important, and what is it?
According to Wendy Park, a senior attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity, another environmental organization, NEPA is a cornerstone environmental law in the United States, effectively our Magna Carta for the environment. This law serves as the basis for constitutions all over the world.
NEPA, which was signed into law by President Richard Nixon in 1970, mandates that federal agencies do environmental impact assessments before proposing acts like constructing roads, bridges, or energy projects. When private corporations request for a permit from a government agency, they are often subject to NEPA rules as well.
The law’s requirement that a project’s potential contributions to climate change be taken into account has grown in significance in recent years.
That’s a pretty critical role because, without it, we’re just working blindly to finish the project without thinking about if there are other ways to achieve the same goal in a more ecologically responsible manner, Park said.
However, industry associations claim that NEPA frequently halts significant projects that take five years or longer to finish.
According to Marty Durbin, head of the U.S. Chamber’s Global Energy Institute, “our flawed permitting system has long been a national embarrassment.” He referred to NEPA as a crude and haphazard instrument that is far too frequently employed to thwart economic growth and investment.
The White House proposal addresses long-standing concerns from both parties that development projects, including those for renewable energy, take too long to be approved. Congress is already working on a permitting reform bill that will modernize NEPA.
What is the latest status of NEPA?
The effectiveness and utility of NEPA may vary depending on how various administrations interpret it.
Trump, a Republican, limited the period for evaluation and public participation as well as the requirements for environmental studies during his first term in office. Joe Biden, a former Democratic president.
Trump has once more attacked the law in his second administration.
Many agencies are doing away with the need for a draft environmental impact statement because it touched on environmental regulations. Additionally, the CEQ stopped performing NEPA reviews in May.
In a related move, the U.S. Supreme Court reduced the extent of environmental studies necessary for large-scale infrastructure projects in May. The court said that NEPA wasn’t intended for a Utah railway expansion project that aims to quadruple oil output.
Dinah Bear, a former chief counsel at the Council on Environmental Quality under both Democratic and Republican administrations, stated that NEPA has had a difficult eight months.
According to John Ruple, a law research professor at the University of Utah, ignoring NEPA can actually make things take longer. Other environmental regulations, such as the Clean Air Act and the Endangered Species Act, nevertheless apply to federal agencies. According to him, one advantage of NEPA that is sometimes disregarded is that it requires coordination with those other laws.
A few instances where NEPA has been involved
In the 1980s, Mary O. Brien, a botanist by profession, was collaborating with a small group in Oregon to suggest several methods for effectively replanting Douglas fir trees that had been cleared for development on federal grounds. According to O Brien, herbicides sprayed into the air to aid in the growth of conifers have not only been connected to health issues in people but also to the death of red alders, another tree species that fir seedlings needed.
The effect of the herbicides on people and red alders was not a concern, according to the U.S. Forest Service. However, the agency was forced to revise their study and ultimately create a new environmental impact statement under NEPA after a judge ordered them to do so.
It’s a basic idea: Don’t just charge ahead. “Consider your options,” O Brien advised.
In addition to co-chairing a working group that provided input on a 2012 Forest Service proposal for aspen restoration on Monroe Mountain in Utah, which was finalized in 2016, O Brien went on to work at the Grand Canyon Trust. Hunters, ranchers, landowners, and loggers all had various ideas about how to approach the restoration. She claimed that NEPA’s mandate to involve the public led to improved planning and research.
According to Stephen Schima, senior legislative counsel at environmental legal NGO Earthjustice, “I believe it’s one of the laws that the public uses the most frequently without the public knowing about it.” For a long time, NEPA has been the only way for local governments, affected stakeholders, and communities to voice their opinions.
Removing NEPA’s authority, according to Schima, jeopardizes the scientific integrity of analyzing the full effects of developments.
“One of the main concerns here is that scientific studies will be used to inform decisions less,” he stated.
NEPA modifications and conflicting views on how to meet the law’s criteria might lead to even more litigation, according to Ruple.
“And all of this will fall on the shoulder of agencies that are losing the staff needed to lead them through these changes,” he stated.
___
The date of a U.S. Forest Service proposal for aspen restoration in Utah has been changed from 2018 to 2012.
___
Melina Walling can be followed on X and Bluesky.
___
Several private foundations provide funding for the Associated Press’s coverage of the environment and climate. All content is the exclusive responsibility of AP. Discover supported coverage areas, a list of supporters, and APs for working with philanthropies at.
